Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Prototype
Items
Properties
All Categories
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Philosophical Research
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Ontology:Q2487
(section)
Ontology
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Combinations === Due to [[Philosophical Research:Schizophrenic point of view|the structure of this wiki]], in which the internal reasoning or mechanics of various ideologies are represented in parallel before then covering how different ideologies support or debunk each other, this motif can easily end up serving as a bridge to any number of "offensive" results. Combinations in general are expected to be interpreted [[redlink - relaterminism / retermination|relative to the vantage point of the two things being combined]], such that "Trotsky" plus "democracy" is expected to yield some result which would make sense from the <i>populational vantage point</i> of a group of Trotskyists, rather than the point of view of the overall Soviet Union or of any overseas country. However, at the same time, it is acceptable to code results which represent the action or path a particular group of people <i>would realistically take</i> and would be obligated to acknowledge as having been their choice if they were intellectually honest and wished to correctly understand history, as long as their vantage point is preserved. This means that in some cases it is acceptable to code routes which combine reactionary concepts to create reactionary propositions or strategies, if they serve an educational purpose of identifying and dissecting reactionary thinking or behavior. "Modest" proposals, while they can be used to criticize other ideologies, run into problems on a meta-ontological level in that when the concept pops up in any other socially-linked group of people with another ideology the standards which set them apart as obviously fake are no longer present and the element of irony is quickly lost; inside a group of Tories, the line between "modest proposal" and "[[redlink - it was just a joke|dogwhistle]] for secretly announcing similar real-world plan" becomes increasingly fine, or nonexistent. This should be considered a problem with the motif itself, rather than [[Philosophical Research:Schizophrenic point of view|SPoV]] or meta-ontological soundness. [[Category:"Modest" proposals ontology]]
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Philosophical Research may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar
free resource
.
Copyright is complete nonsense
, but people do have to buy items to be able to charge anyone taxes.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)